See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/317394886

Integrated one-dimensional modeling of asphaltene deposition in

wellbores/pipelines

Conference Paper · April 2017

DOI: 10.1109/ICMSAO.2017.7934921

CITATION READS

1 81

7 authors, including:

Qiangshun Guan yit fatt Yap

Khalifa University Khalifa University
4 PUBLICATIONS   3 CITATIONS    74 PUBLICATIONS   644 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Afshin Goharzadeh John C Chai

Khalifa University of Science and Technology University of Huddersfield
63 PUBLICATIONS   360 CITATIONS    156 PUBLICATIONS   2,935 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Probing Asphaltene Deposition in Near-wellbore Region View project

Probing Asphaltene Deposition in Near-Wellbore Region View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Qiangshun Guan on 10 September 2018.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 Integrated One-Dimensional Modeling of
Asphaltene Deposition in Wellbores/Pipelines
Q. Guan, Y.F. Yap*, A. Goharzadeh
Department of Mechanical Engineering
The Petroleum Institute
Abu Dhabi, UAE
*email: yfatt@pi.ac.ae
F.M. Vargas, W.G. Chapman
Department of Chemical and Biomolecular Engineering
Rice University
Houston, USA
Abstract—Asphaltene deposition in wellbores/pipelines causes
serious production losses in the oil and gas industry. This work
presents a numerical model to predict asphaltene deposition in
wellbores/pipelines. This model consists of two modules: a Thermo-
dynamic Module and a Transport Module. The Thermodynamic
Module models asphaltene precipitation using the Peng-Robinson
Equation of State with Peneloux volume translation (PR-Peneloux
EOS). The Transport Module covers the modeling of fluid transport,
asphaltene particle transport and asphaltene deposition. These
modules are combined via a thermodynamic properties lookup-table
generated by the Thermodynamic Module prior to simulation. In this
work, the Transport Module and the Thermodynamic Module are first
verified and validated separately. Then, the integrated model is
applied to an oilfield case with asphaltene deposition problem where
a reasonably accurate prediction of asphaltene deposit profile is
achieved.
Keywords—integrated modeling, 1D, asphaltene deposition,
wellbore/pipeline, thermodynamic module, transport module
I. INTRODUCTION
Asphaltene deposition can appear at various stages of oil
production, transportation and processing, leading to arterial
blockages of wellbores, pipelines, separators, heat exchangers
and other surface facilities [1-3]. As oil flows up along the
wellbores/pipelines, due to the changes in pressure (p),
temperature (T) and oil composition, asphaltene precipitation
usually takes place producing particles. Some of these particles
deposit on wall surface forming an asphaltene deposit layer.
The effective flow area is reduced and the pressure drop
increases resulting in reduced oil production. The preventive
and remedial measures are accompanied by economic losses in
the form of treatment cost and daily production loss [4]. This
necessitates improved methods to accurately forecast
asphaltene deposition in wellbores/pipelines.
Ramirez-Jaramillo et al. [5] developed a multiphase multi-
component hydrodynamic model for asphaltene deposition in
production pipelines. Soulgani et al. [6] fitted a correlation for
asphaltene deposition rate and coupled to the correlation of
Begges and Brill [7] for flow with asphaltene precipitation
determined using the approach in [8]. Eskin et al. [9-10]
developed an asphaltene deposition model in pipelines with
shear removal included under the assumption that only the
978-1-5090-5454-1/17/$31.00 ©2017 IEEE
J.C. Chai
Department of Engineering and Technology
University of Huddersfield
Huddersfield, UK
M. Zhang
School of Energy and Power Engineering
Nanjing University of Science and Technology
Nanjing, P.R. China
particles smaller than a critical size can deposit. Vargas et al.
[11] proposed a model which simultaneously considered
asphaltene precipitation, particle transport, asphaltene
aggregation and deposition. Kurup et al. [12-13] further
simplified the model to one-dimension, and included diffusion
due to turbulent velocity fluctuation.
In these aforementioned studies, the coupling effect of the
growing deposit layer on flow fields and eventually the
deposition process itself has not been accounted for. Because
of the modeling complication of a moving boundary problem,
the deposit layer is usually assumed thin enough and does not
affect the flow fields. However, according to the field data
from the Hassi Messaoud field [14], the South Kuwait’s Marrat
field [15], and the West Kuwait’s Marrat field [16], the
asphaltene deposit layer formed can block respectively about
44%, 60% and 55% of the cross-sectional area in these
production strings. It is evident that the deposit layer is not thin
and therefore should be considered. Modeling of the effect of
growing deposit layer fully coupled with flow fields is present
in Ge et al. [17]. In their model, no thermodynamic module
was included, because particles are assumed to be carried by
flow from the inlet and no precipitation occurs. In view of this,
the present study intends to develop an integrated model for
asphaltene deposition in wellbores/pipelines which fully
accounts for the effect of growing deposit layer coupled to the
flow and temperature fields and to the deposition process itself.
II. PROBLEM DESCRIPTION AND MODELING FRAMEWORK
In general, asphaltenes can exist in oil in different forms:
dissolved asphaltene, precipitated asphaltene particle, and
aggregated asphaltene particle. Under reservoir condition (high
p and high T), asphaltenes are stable in oil as dissolved
asphaltenes. As oil flows up along the wellbore, both p and T
drop continuously. When a specific p and T condition (i.e. the
asphaltene precipitation onset condition) is reached, asphaltene
precipitation starts to occur forming small particles, i.e.
precipitated asphaltene particles (Fig. 1). These small particles
can agglomerate with each other to form aggregated asphaltene
particles of a larger particle size (Fig. 1). The precipitated and
aggregated asphaltene particles are transported (i) along the
flow direction from upstream to downstream, and (ii) along the • Oil density and viscosity depend only on p and T.
radial direction from the fluid bulk to the near-wall region. In • Oil flow is a single-phase multi-component fluid.
the present study, it is assumed that all aggregated asphaltene
particles are carried by oil flow downstream due to larger B. Transport Module
inertia, and only precipitated asphaltene particles can diffuse The governing equations are listed here.
radially towards wall. Some of these precipitated asphaltene Fluid Transport:
particles that reach the depositing front potentially stick to it
∂
and become deposits. This sticking process is asphaltene (ρα ) + ∂ (ραu ) = −αR dep (2)
deposition. As more particles deposit over time, the asphaltene ∂t ∂x
∂
deposit layer grows gradually. Meanwhile, the fluid volume
fraction decreases accompanied by the changes in velocity (u)
∂
(ραu ) + (ραuu ) = −α  ∂p + ρg − f w  (3)
∂t ∂x  ∂x 
and pressure drop. The fluid volume fraction (α) in a given ∂ ∂
section of the wellbore/pipeline Δx is defined as (ρc pαT ) + (ρc pαuT ) = αRT (4)
∂t ∂x
V A Δx πr 2 Δx r 2
α= f = f = = (1) Particle Transport:
VCV AΔx πR 2 Δx R 2 ∂
where A and Af represent respectively cross-sectional area of
(αCdis ) + ∂ (αuCdis ) = −αR pre (5)
∂t ∂x
the wellbore/pipeline and flow (Fig. 1c) with radii of R and r. ∂
∂t
∂
(
(αC pre ) + (αuC pre ) = α R pre − R dep − R agg
∂x
) (6)
Asphaltene Deposition:
R dep = k dep C pre
m dep
(7)
R dep = k dep C pre
mdep
(8)
dα αR
= − dep (9)
dt ρ dep
C. Thermodynamic Module
The rate of asphaltene precipitation (Ṙpre) is modelled by [11]
k pre (Cdis − Ceq ) , if Cdis ≥ Ceq
R pre =  (10)
(a) (b) cross-section (c) elemental control volume − k dis C pre , if Cdis < Ceq
Fig. 1. Schematic of oil transportation in a circular wellbore/pipeline where Ceq is the equilibrium asphaltene concentration at the
specified p and T. The oil of interest is assumed consisting of
Based on the above description, a complete model of two liquid phases: an asphaltene lean liquid phase (L1), and an
asphaltene deposition in wellbores/pipelines contains four asphaltene-rich liquid phase (L2). All precipitated asphaltene
ingredients: (i) Asphaltene Precipitation, (ii) Fluid Transport, particles exist only in the L2. Under this, Ceq is calculated by
(iii) Particle Transport, and (iv) Asphaltene Deposition. Among β x MWasph
these, Asphaltene Precipitation predicts locally the amount of Ceq = 1 asph (11)
precipitated asphaltene particles formed at given p and T. Fluid υ liquid
Transport predicts the flow fields (u and p) in the wellbore or where β1 is the mole fraction of the L1 in the oil, xasph the mole
pipeline. Particle Transport predicts the distributions of various fraction of asphaltene in the L1, MWasph the molar weight of
forms of asphaltenes (i.e. dissolved asphaltenes, precipitated asphaltene, and υ the molar volume of the total liquid phase. A
asphaltene particles, and aggregated asphaltene particles). multi-component multi-phase flash calculation algorithm is
Asphaltene Deposition predicts the amount of precipitated developed based on the isothermal flash method of [19, 20]
asphaltene particles attaching onto the deposit front. These four using the Peng-Robinson EOS [21, 22] with Peneloux volume
ingredients interact with each other and are tightly coupled. translation [23] (PR-Peneloux EOS). The details of this flash
Therefore, in order to give an accurate prediction of all the calculation algorithm are presented in [18].
physics involved, these four ingredients should be considered Liquid density (ρliquid) is calculated from
simultaneously. From a modeling point, these four ingredients
β1 i =1 xi MWi + β 2 i =1 yi MWi
Nc Nc

can be grouped into two sub-modules: a Thermodynamic ρ liquid = (12)

Module and a Transport Module. υ liquid
and viscosity (μliquid) is determined using the corresponding
III. MATHEMATICAL FORMULATION states viscosity model as introduced in [24].
A. Assumptions
• Only precipitated asphaltene particles can deposit. IV. SOLUTION PROCEDURE
• Rigid solid deposit with constant density. The governing equations, i.e. Eqs. (2), (3), (4), (5) and (6),
• No shear removal of asphaltene deposit. can be re-written in a general form:
 ∂ ~
(αρ φ ) + ∂ (αρ~φu ) = αSφ (13)
potentially insufficient to describe all the processes occurring
along the entire capillary. In addition, the shear removal of
∂t ∂x
where , and represent respectively the “appropriate” upstream deposits and re-deposition downstream are also not
considered in the present model. Nevertheless, the Transport
density, variable of interest, and source term. Equation (13) is Module is capable of predicting the overall trend of asphaltene
solved using the finite volume method [25] on a regular mesh deposit profile, in particular the location and magnitude of the
(Fig. 2), subjected to the initial and boundary conditions as maximum deposit layer thickness.
Initial condition: φ (x, t = 0) = φ0 (14a)
Boundary condition: φ (x = 0, t ) = φinlet (14b) 0.2
Predicted by the Transport Module
0.22
t = 35.9 h, 320CVs, Δt = 1.4s used in the simulation
0.18 0.2
The discretized form of (13) in the hatched control volume is 0.16
320CVs, Δt = 1.4s
640CVs, Δt = 0.7s 0.18
Predicted by the Transport Module
Experimental measurements in [12]

Deposit Layer Thickness, δ (mm)

Deposit Layer Thickness, δ (mm)
 (αρ~φ )in − (αρ~φ )in −1 
[ ]
0.16
~ n ~ n
 ΔV + (αρ φu )i − (αρ φu )i −1 A
0.14 t increases

 0.12
0.14

 Δ t  (15) 0.1
0.12

= (αSφ )i ΔV
0.1
n 0.08
0.08
0.06
0.06
0.04 0.04

0.02 0.02

0 0
0 2.5 5 7.5 10 12.5 15 17.5 20 22.5 25 27.5 30 32.5 0 2.5 5 7.5 10 12.5 15 17.5 20 22.5 25 27.5 30 32.5
Axial length, x (m) Axial length, x (m)
(a) deposit layer thickness (b) comparison with experimental data
20 0.03
Predicted by the Transport Module Predicted by the Transport Module
0
320CVs, Δt = 1.4s 0.027
320CVs, Δt = 1.4s
Fig. 2. Schematic representation of the discretized computational domain -20
640CVs, Δt = 0.7s
640CVs, Δt = 0.7s
0.024
-40

Fluid Velocity, u(m/s)

Pressure, P(kPa)
t increases
To integrate the two modules, a lookup table containing all
0.021
-60

-80
the outputs of the Thermodynamic Module (i.e. Ceq, ρliquid and
0.018

-100

μliquid) is generated prior to simulation. During simulation, the

0.015
-120

Transport Module will linearly interpolate the required data -140

0.012

from this table according to the predicted p and T. -160 t increases

0.009

V. RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS
A. Verification and Validation of the Transport Module
The present Transport Module is employed to predict the
experimental results of asphaltene deposition in capillary tubes
[12, 27]. In the simulation, kpre=1.45×10-3s-1, kagg=5.07×10-3 s-1
and kdep=1.31×10-2s-1 determined in [12] are used. Besides,
Ceq=0 is set considering the fixed temperature condition and
small pressure variation. Because of this setting, the
Thermodynamic Module is not required. As for kdis, due to the
lack of information in existing studies, it is also set to zero.
Fig. 3a shows a much thicker deposit formed near the inlet
and progressively thinner downstream. This is because the
precipitated asphaltene particle concentration near the inlet is
higher, and it decreases along the capillary tube as deposition
takes place consuming the precipitated asphaltene particles,
thus resulting in a gradually lower potential to deposit. The
deposit layer thickness at t=35.9h is compared to the
experiment result of [12] in Fig. 3b. The prediction of the
Transport Module agrees qualitatively with the measurement.
By setting Ceq=0 and kdis=0, the Transport Module over-
predicts the amount of asphaltene deposits formed before
17.2m. However, the measured deposit profile in the near-exit-
region is not captured well by the Transport Module. The
prediction shows almost minute asphaltene deposit is formed
toward the outlet of the capillary owing to the exhaustion of
precipitated asphaltene particle in the flowing oil-precipitant
mixture. While the experiment result indicates a relatively
high amount of deposit with an almost constant deposit
thickness near the exit. This discrepancy may be caused by the
use of constant kinetic parameters in the present model
-180 0.006
0 2.5 5 7.5 10 12.5 15 17.5 20 22.5 25 27.5 30 32.5 0 2.5 5 7.5 10 12.5 15 17.5 20 22.5 25 27.5 30 32.5
Axial length, x (m) Axial length, x (m)
(c) pressure (d) fluid velocity
Fig. 3. Simulation results of the capillary aspahtlene experiment
B. Verification and Validation of the Thermodynamic Module
The Thermodynamic Module is used to predict the
asphaltene weight fraction (wasph) in a crude oil at varying
pressures but a fixed temperature (322K). The compositions of
this oil in mol% are given in [30]. The asphaltene onset data
and bubble points are extracted from [29]. The oil parameters
after characterization and the binary interaction parameters
(BIPs) employed in simulation are presented in [18].
Fig. 4a shows the comparison between the predicted
asphaltene precipitation envelope (APE) and the available
asphaltene onset data and bubble pressures (BP) for the
selected oil. The Thermodynamic Module under-predicts BP
slightly with an average discrepancy of 10.25%, but gives
accurate predictions of the upper asphaltene onset pressure
(UAOP) and the lower asphaltene onset pressure (LAOP).
Besides, the predicted oil density is 39.83°API, which matches
the range of 36°–40°API reported in [29]. In addition, the
asphaltene content in stock tank oil (STO) is predicted as
0.545wt%. This agrees very well with the experimental value
(i.e. 0.5wt% C7-asphaltene) through SARA analysis in [29].
The predicted wasph using the present Thermodynamic
Module is compared with available experiment data in Fig. 4b.
The wasph drops almost linearly in the ‘L1+L2’ region, highly
consistent with the experimental data in [28]. However, the
predicted wasph in the ‘L1+L2+V’ region deviates from the
experimental measurements, although their trends are similar.
This may arise from the poor prediction of BP. Overall, the
Thermodynamic Module is able to give a reasonably accurate
prediction of wasph at varying pressures and T=322K. This case
verifies and validates the developed Thermodynamic Module.
(a) APE (b) wasph
Fig. 4. Thermodynamic modeling results
C. Case Study: Field Asphaltene Deposition Problem*
The integrated model is applied for asphaltene deposition
problems of the South Kuwait’s Marrat field [15]. The well
depth, well diameter and oil production rate are respectively
15000ft, 2.75in and 5000STB/day. Besides, the following
kinetic coefficients are used: kpre=1.8×10-3s-1, kdis=1.7×10-2s-1,
kagg=1.8×10-3s-1, and kdep=2.1×10-4s-1.
In a previous section, a crude oil sample from the same
well has been studied thermodynamically (Fig. 4). The
predicted APE (Fig. 4a) is shown together with the operating
conditions given in [12] indicated by a P-T trace line.
According to this P-T trace line, the p and T at reservoir are
8497psia and 230°F, and those at wellhead are 321psia and
118°F. As depicted in Fig. 4a, the operating conditions span
all those regions divided by the APE. However, the developed
Transport Module is limited only for single-phase or homo-
genous flow. It is not applicable when p and T is below bubble
point where one more vapor phase is formed in the oil. Similar
to the work done in [12], the average velocity (2.40m/s) is
prescribed throughout the entire wellbore. Besides, both of p
and T are assumed to vary linearly from reservoir to wellhead.
Under these assumptions, the conservation equations of fluid
mass, momentum and energy are not solved during simulation.
Only α, Cdis and Cpre require to be determined.
Finally, the predicted δ, Cdis and Cpre by the developed
model are presented in Fig. 5. From Fig. 5a, asphaltene
deposition occurs at around 12000-ft well depth and then
strengthens continuously till its peak at approximately 4000ft.
After that, asphaltene deposition decreases rapidly and almost
diminishes at the location of 1500-ft well depth. This can be
explained by the variation of asphaltene concentration. Shown
in Fig. 5b, above UAOP, the predicted Cdis is slightly larger
*
Note: Field units (ft, psia and °F) are used to investigate oilfield asphaltene
deposition problems in place of the SI units (m, Pa, and K).
than Ceq because both of p and T in the wellbore deplete when
oil flows up leading to a small decrease of Ceq. However, the
difference between Cdis and Ceq is so small that the extent of
precipitation process is negligible. Below UAOP, asphaltene
precipitation occurs and Ceq decreases dramatically. The larger
difference between Cdis and Ceq stands for stronger asphaltene
precipitation. The predicted Cpre increases continuously from
UAOP to BP (Fig. 5c). When the operating condition falls
below BP, some light components come out making the oil
more stable. In this instance, Ceq increases. Nevertheless, at
this moment, Cdis is still larger than Ceq, which implies that
asphaltene precipitation continues consuming the dissolved
asphaltenes. When Cdis is lower than Ceq, the re-dissolution of
the precipitated asphaltene particles happens. Consequently,
Cdis increases slightly. Meanwhile, the re-dissolution process
exhausts the precipitated asphaltene particles, therefore the
deposition process alleviates and finally ceases.
In Fig. 6, the deposit layer thickness predicted by the
present model is compared with the simulation result of [12]
and the caliper measurements in [31]. Fig. 6a shows that the
present model gives a similar prediction of the asphaltene
deposit profile but shifted downstream (towards the wellhead).
The predicted maximum deposit layer thickness locates at the
well depth of almost 2800ft, whereas in [12] it is around
4200ft. This is because, as discussed in the former section, the
Thermodynamic Module under-predicts the BP about 10.25%
on average. However, asphaltene deposition usually reaches
its peak just at BP. Since p decreases continuously during oil
transportation, the under-prediction of BP leads to the shift of
the maximum deposit point downstream in the wellbore. The
inaccurate prediction of BP may stem from the parameter
acquisition process where the required parameters are only
tuned to match available UAOP data rather than BP data. In
Fig. 6b, after the predicted deposit layer thickness is translated
1500ft upstream to account for the under-prediction of BP,
good consistence with the measurements in [31] can be
observed. Therefore, if a more accurate prediction of BP is
available, the present model is able to give a reasonably
accurate prediction of asphaltene deposition profile.
 0.65 0.65
4.5
7003
P
next task, a two-phase flow model needs to be incorporated
200CVs, Δt=8.0s Predicted Cdis using 200CVs,
200CVs andΔt=8.0s
and Δt=8.0s
together with a more accurate EOS (e.g. PC-SAFT EOS).
0.6 650
0.6
t increases t increases Predicted Cpre using 200CVs Δt=8.0s
UAOP
400CVs, Δt=4.0s
400CVs, Δt=4.0s 4 Predicted Cdis using
Predicted 400CVs
Cpre using and
400CVs Δt=4.0s
Δt=4.0s
andBP
0.55 600
0.55 LAOP
2.5
550
3.5 t increases

δ (in)
Deposit Layer Thickness, δ (in)

0.5 0.5
500
0.45 0.45
32

Thickness,
0.4
450
0.4
REFERENCES

33
) )
400
2.5

C P (kg/mpre (kg/m
0.35 0.35

(bar)
350
1.5
[1] K. Akbarzadeh, A. Hammami, A. Kharrat, D. Zhang, S. Allenson, J.

u
0.3 0.3 Ceq

Deposit Layer
2

Cdis
300
0.25 0.25
250
1.51
Creek, et al., "Asphaltenes—Problematic but Rich in Potential," Oilfield
200 t increases
0.2 0.2
0.15 0.15
1
150
Review, vol. 19, pp. 22-43, 2007.
0.1 Oil flow direction 0.5
0.1
100
0.5 Oil flow direction
Oil flow direction
[2] G. A. Mansoori, "Remediation of Asphaltene and Other Heavy Organic
0.05
0
0.05
50

0
Deposits in Oil Wells and in Pipelines," SOCAR Proceedings, vol. 2010,
0 3000 6000 9000 12000 15000 0 3000
3000 6000
6000
Well
Welldepth
depth
9000
9000
deph (ft)
(ft)
12000
12000 15000
15000
pp. 12-23, 2010.
Well depth (ft) Well (ft)
(a) deposit layer thickness (b) dissolved asphaltene concentration [3] M. P. Hoepfner, V. Limsakoune, V. Chuenmeechao, T. Maqbool, and H.
3
S. Fogler, "A Fundamental Study of Asphaltene Deposition," Energy &
Predicted Cpre using 200CVs and Δt=8.0s Fuels, vol. 27, pp. 725-735, 2013.
Predicted Cpre using 400CVs and Δt=4.0s
2.5
[4] J. L. Creek, "Freedom of Action in the State of Asphaltenes: Escape
t increases
from Conventional Wisdom," Energy & Fuels, vol. 19, pp. 1212-1224,
2
2005.
Cpre (kg/m )
3

1.5 [5] E. Ramirez-Jaramillo, C. Lira-Galeana, and O. Manero, "Modeling

Asphaltene Deposition in Production Pipelines," Energy & Fuels, vol.
1
20, pp. 1184-1196, 2006.
0.5 [6] B. S. Soulgani, D. Rashtchian, B. Tohidi, and M. Jamialahmadi,
Oil flow direction
"Integrated Modelling Methods for Asphaltene Deposition in
0
0 3000 6000 9000 12000 15000
Wellstring," Journal of the Japan Petroleum Institute, vol. 52, pp. 322-
Well deph (ft) 331, 2009.
(c) precipitated asphaltene concentration [7] D. H. Beggs and J. P. Brill, "A Study of Two-Phase Flow in Inclined
Fig. 5. Thermodynamic modeling results Pipes," Journal of Petroleum technology, vol. 25, pp. 607-617, 1973.
[8] A. Hirschberg, L. DeJong, B. Schipper, and J. Meijer, "Influence of
Temperature and Pressure on Asphaltene Flocculation," Society of
Petroleum Engineers Journal, vol. 24, pp. 283-293, 1984.
[9] D. Eskin, J. Ratulowski, K. Akbarzadeh, and S. Pan, "Modelling
0.65
Asphaltene Deposition in Turbulent Pipeline Flows," The Canadian
0.6
Journal of Chemical Engineering, vol. 89, pp. 421-441, 2011.
0.55
[10] K. Akbarzadeh, D. Eskin, J. Ratulowski, and S. Taylor, "Asphaltene
0.5
Deposition Measurement and Modeling for Flow Assurance of Tubings
Deposit Layer Thickness, δ (in)

0.45 and Flow Lines," Energy & Fuels, vol. 26, pp. 495-510, 2011.
0.4
[11] F. M. Vargas, J. L. Creek, and W. G. Chapman, "On the Development of
0.35 an Asphaltene Deposition Simulator," Energy & Fuels, vol. 24, pp.
0.3 2294-2299, 2010.
0.25
200CVs and Δt=8.0s for the present simulation
[12] A. S. Kurup, F. M. Vargas, J. Wang, J. Buckley, J. L. Creek, H.
0.2 Subramani, J, et al., "Development and Application of an Asphaltene
0.15
Deposit profile predicted in this work
Deposit profile reported in [31]
Deposition Tool (ADEPT) for Well Bores," Energy & Fuels, vol. 25, pp.
0.1 Note: The predicted deposit profile by the present model
4506-4516, 2011.
was shifted 1500ft down the well to match the reported
0.05 deposition ending point . [13] A. S. Kurup, J. Wang, H. J. Subramani, J. Buckley, J. L. Creek, and W.
0 G. Chapman, "Revisiting Asphaltene Deposition Tool (ADEPT): Field
3000 4000 5000 6000 7000 8000
Application," Energy & Fuels, vol. 26, pp. 5702-5710, 2012.
Well depth (ft)
[14] C. E. Haskett and M. Tartera, "A Practical Solution to the Problem of
Asphaltene Deposits-Hassi Messaoud Field, Algeria," Journal of
(a) (b)
Petroleum Technology, vol. 17, pp. 387-391, 1965.
Fig. 6. Prediction of asphatlene deposit layer thickness by the model
compared with the simulation results of [12] (a) and the experimental [15] C. Kabir, A. Hasan, D. Lin, and X. Wang, "An Approach to Mitigating
measurements of [31] (b). Wellbore Solids Deposition," in SPE Annual Technical Conference and
Exhibition, 2001.
VI. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS [16] S. F. Alkafeef, F. Al-Medhadi, and A. D. Al-Shammari, "A Simplified
Method to Predict and Prevent Asphaltene Deposition in Oilwell
A one-dimensional asphaltene deposition model in Tubings: Field Case," in SPE Annual Technical Conference and
wellbores/pipelines is presented. This model simultaneously Exhibition, 2003.
considers all the processes involved through integrating the [17] Q. Ge, Y. Yap, F. Vargas, M. Zhang, and J. Chai, "Numerical Modeling
Thermodynamic Module with the Transport Module. Those of Asphaltene Deposition," Computational Thermal Sciences, vol. 5, pp.
two modules are first verified and validated separately. Then 153-163, 2013.
the integrated model is used to study an oilfield asphaltene [18] Q. Guan, "Asphaltene Deposition in One Dimensional Multicomponent
Flows," Master of Science, The Petroleum Institute (United Arab
deposition problem. A reasonably accurate prediction of the Emirates), 2016.
asphaltene deposit layer profile is observed. The developed
[19] M. L. Michelsen, "The Isothermal Flash Problem. Part I. Stability,"
model accounts for the variation in the flow cross-sectional Fluid Phase Equilibria, vol. 9, pp. 1-19, 1982.
area due to the occurrence and evolution of the deposit layer. [20] M. L. Michelsen, "The Isothermal Flash Problem. Part II. Phase-Split
This variation affects u and p fields and eventually the Calculation," Fluid Phase Equilibria, vol. 9, pp. 21-40, 1982.
asphaltene precipitation and deposition processes. As for the
[21] D.-Y. Peng and D. B. Robinson, "A New Two-Constant Equation of
State," Industrial & Engineering Chemistry Fundamentals, vol. 15, pp.
59-64, 1976.
[22] D. B. Robinson and D.-Y. Peng, The Characterization of the Heptanes
and Heavier Fractions for the GPA Peng-Robinson Programs: Gas
Processors Association, 1978.
[23] A. Péneloux, E. Rauzy, and R. Fréze, "A Consistent Correction for
Redlich-Kwong-Soave Volumes," Fluid Phase Equilibria, vol. 8, pp. 7-
23, 1982.
[24] K. S. Pedersen, P. L. Christensen, and J. A. Shaikh, Phase Behavior of
Petroleum Reservoir Fluids: CRC Press, 2006.
[25] S. V. Patankar, Numerical Heat Transfer and Fluid Flow. New York:
Hemisphere Publisher, 1980.
[26] H. K. Versteeg and W. Malalasekera, An Introduction to Computational
Fluid Dynamics: The Finite Volume Method, 2nd ed. England: Prentice
Education Limited, 2007.
View publication stats
[27] J. Wang, J. S. Buckley, and J. L. Creek, "Asphaltene Deposition on
Metallic Surfaces," Journal of Dispersion Science and Technology, vol.
25, pp. 287-298, 2004.
[28] X. Zhang, N. Pedrosa, and T. Moorwood, "Modeling Asphaltene Phase
Behavior: Comparison of Methods for Flow Assurance Studies," Energy
& Fuels, vol. 26, pp. 2611-2620, 2012.
[29] C. Kabir and A. Jamaluddin, "Asphaltene Characterization and
Mitigation in South Kuwait's Marrat Reservoir," in Middle East Oil
Show and Conference, 1999.
[30] A. Arya, N. von Solms, and G. M. Kontogeorgis, "Determination of
Asphaltene Onset Conditions Using the Cubic Plus Association
Equation of State," Fluid Phase Equilibria, vol. 400, pp. 8-19, 2015.
[31] C. Kabir and A. Jamaluddin, "Asphaltene Characterization and
Mitigation in South Kuwait's Marrat Reservoir," SPE Production &
Facilities, vol. 17, pp. 251-258, 2002.